Wodzinski Good Maskilim and Bad Assimilationists, or Toward A New Historiography of The Haskalah in Poland

Good Maskilim and Bad
Assimilationists, or
Toward a New
Historiography of the
Haskalah in Poland
Marcin Wodziski
he Jewish Enlightenment movement in the territories of Central Polandthat is, in the Kingdom of Poland and its predecessor, the Duchy of Warsaw, as distinct from Russia or
Galiciais a phenomenon notable for its virtual absence from contemporary studies of the Haskalah and the history of Jewish society in
nineteenth-century Poland.1 A mere cursory examination of most of
the works devoted to the Haskalah in recent years shows that, in the
minds of Haskalah historians, the territories of the Kingdom of Poland
were an undifferentiated part of the Russian empire.2 The last to write
about Polish maskilim were in fact historians from pre-war Jewish
school of historiography in Poland, most notably Ignacy Schiper,
Jacob Shatzky, and Raphael Mahler.3 The lack of attention paid to
Central Poland for the past half-century is even more peculiar, given
that, numerically, the Jewish population in these territories constituted the second greatest concentration (after Ukraine) of Jews in
nineteenth-century Europe and exceeded the Jewish populations of
Lithuania, Belarus, and Galicia not only in actual numbers but also in
terms of proportional representation in the countrys general population and in their particularly high urban concentration. In 1830, the
390,400 Jews living in the Kingdom of Poland constituted 10 percent
of the general population. They constituted 35.3 percent of the urban
population in 1827, and this would increase to 46.5 percent by 1865.
www.judaistyka.uni.wroc.pl
[88]
Jewish
Social
Studies
Historians have noted that the first maskilim who functioned in Polish territories came from these areas or were active in the central provinces of the old Polish Commonwealth (mainly in Warsaw) in the
1780s and 1790s.4 Did such forerunners of the Haskalah in Eastern
Europe as Jacques Calmanson, Israel Zamo, Zalkind Hourwitz, and
Issachar Ber Falkensohn really leave no successors? When they departed, did the Haskalah cease to exist on Polish soil? Quite the contrary. The Haskalah movement, as I will show, flourished in Central
Poland from the 1790s until the early 1860s, and the disciples of the
movement (among them Chaim Zelig Sonimski) were active as late as
1890s.5 However, even if it were the case that the Haskalah, in its
march eastward, did bypass the territories of the Kingdom of Poland,
an understanding of such an unusual development would provide us
with important information both about the nature of the Jewish Enlightenment movement and about Jewish society in Central Poland. If
the processes of emancipation and modernization assumed a different
form in Central Poland from those in Galicia or Imperial Russia, the
fundamental issue will then be to define these differences and to make
a detailed analysis of those factors that gave rise to the differences and
the consequences thereof.
Irrespective of the above-mentioned issues, the question of the possible existence and character of a specifically Polish (as opposed to Russian or Galician) Haskalah has been almost completely overlooked in
recent decades. This found expression in the frequently occurring and
very telling phrase in publications devoted to the East European faction
of the Haskalah movement: the Haskalah in Eastern Europe, that is, in
Russia and Galicia.6 An expression such as this, whether stated or implicit in the texts of the most eminent contemporary Haskalah historians, would be justifiable only if Imperial Russia and Galicia were the
sole political entities in nineteenth-century Eastern Europe or if there
were no Jewish Enlightenment movement outside their borders.
However, commonsense and a knowledge of Polish history (for
more about this, see further) convince us that both of the above premises are incorrect. Naturally, not all representatives of the Jewish
progressive (as they called themselves) camp in Poland were
maskilim. But an analysis of the letters and activities of a variety of
those persons active in the Haskalah, and particularly an analysis of the
premises that convinced early historians to deny them the honorific
appellation maskilim, prove that the maskilic group in Poland was
greater and more influential than traditional historiography was wont
to recognize. An understanding of the ideological biases, stereotypes,
and interpretative errors leading to the exclusion of the Polish
Haskalah from the scope of virtually all those researching the

nineteenth-century Jewish Enlightenment seems significant, and not
only because it allows one to view in a truer light the history of the
Haskalah in Eastern and Central Europe. The issue is all the more fascinating because, in this single example, we have a classic illustration
of the way in which the ideologies of twentieth-century historians have
obfuscated and to date are misinterpreting the historiography of European Jews in the era of emancipation and modernization. Although
the ideological implications of twentieth-century Jewish historiography have been acknowledged appropriately, and although numerous
studies in recent years have corrected the misapprehensions that have
long-since dominated the historical picture,7 the example of the Polish Haskalah proves that we still have far to go to come to grips with all
the consequences of early, nationally oriented historiography.
What Was the Kingdom of Poland?

As noted above, it appears that the first reason for the omission of the
Polish Haskalah from the research of contemporary historians into
the Jewish enlightenment is the misinformed conviction that the Kingdom of Poland was an integral part of the Russian Pale of Settlement
and that, apart from the relatively insignificant differences in the
structure of society and the legal situation, it did not differ greatly
from the remaining provinces in the western part of Imperial Russia.
This is a heritage of old Russian Jewish historiography of the Dubnowian school, which quite imperialistically viewed all of Eastern Europes
Jews as Russian. Although the political agendas of this view have been
long gone, the same stubborn attitude can be found among contemporary historians researching nineteenth-century Jewish society.
Either they do not mention the existence of the Kingdom of Poland at
all,8 or they quote facts from Central Poland with no explanation that
they do not originate from the Russian Pale of Settlement but from a
different political entity,9 or, having pointed out the separate nature of
the kingdomor even having devoted significant attention to itthey
treat its past as if, in effect, it were a part of the history of the Jews of
Russia.10 Naturally, all of these attitudes occur equally among those researching the Jewish Enlightenment.11
Such attitudes find certain justification in the fact that East European Haskalah historians have been dealing mainly with facts and publications that derive from the last decades of that century, when the
actual degree of independence of the Kingdom of Poland was mini-
[89]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[90]
Jewish
Social
Studies
mal. In addition, from the 1860s, along with the commencement by

the tsarist authorities of the politics of Russification, the existence of a
pro-Russian stance was more evident among the Warsaw maskilim. Its
best-known, though very moderate, representative was Chaim Zelig
Sonimski and his Hebrew-language weekly Ha-tsefirah. However, one
should not forget that the group moving toward Russian identity never
gained widespread influence among the progressive Jewish population in Poland. Also, the anti-Polish pronouncements of Abraham
Paperna or Feivel Schiffer were an exception on Polish soil, and the
predominating tendency in Jewish intellectual circles right up to the
end of the nineteenth century was that represented by the pro-Polish,
Polish-language weeklies Jutrzenka (186163) and Izraelita (1866
1915) as well as the circles connected with these publications. The
most significant identifying features of this relatively large group at the
end of the nineteenth century were its use of the Polish language, its
strong integration with Polish culture, and, above all, its frequently
emphasized Polish national identity.12 This distinguished Polish enlightened Jews from the Jewish progressives of Belarus, Lithuania,
and Ukraine; hence the treatment of Jewish society in Poland as an integral part of Russian Jewry lacks a solid foundation.
Also, in purely political terms, the Congress Kingdom was indeed a
separate and distinct entity. The new Kingdom of Poland, also known
as the Congress Kingdom, was created on the basis of the decision of
the Vienna Congress in 1815 and effectively perpetuated the founding
principles of the constitutional Napoleonic Duchy of Warsaw, on the
ruins of which it arose. Admittedly, there was a personal connection
between the kingdom and Imperial Russia, but the autocratic ruler of
Russia was a mere king in Poland (official documents never referred to
him as tsar), and his authority was limited by the constitution. The
powers of the king were limited also by certain prerogatives of the parliament (Sejm) and government (the Administrative Council) and the
viceroy as well as by the independent nature of the justice system. The
Sejms legislative powers were limited (for example, it had no right of
legislative initiative), but it did monitor the functioning of the government and bestowed immunity on members of parliament, which in
Europe at the time was a new and important prerogative. The government was appointed by the king and was accountable to him, but the
constitution also introduced the principle of legal responsibility of the
ministers: for royal decrees to become law, they had to be countersigned by the minister responsible for that portfolio. Thus, the Kingdom of Poland was, as is often written, a semi-independent entity,
ruled by independent organs of state, with its own territory, its own em-
blems and borders, in which its inhabitants had Polish, not Russian,
citizenship as well as wide civic freedoms. A separate and independent
school system, judiciary, legislature (also applying to the Jews), monetary system, and even army meant that the kingdom had an entirely
Polish character. Polish was the sole official language (correspondence with St. Petersburg was in French), and state functionaries had
to be citizens of the kingdom. Although there were exceptions to this
rule (for example, Grand Duke Constantine was the head of the Polish
army, and Senator Nikolai Novosiltzoff was the tsars special envoy),
such exceptions occurred only in individual cases and had no connection with the subordination of the state apparatus by Russian functionaries. The existence of a legal liberal opposition, something
unprecedented in the Russian Empire, is evidence of the independence of the Congress Kingdom, as is the independence of the judicatory powers, which was most evident during the parliamentary court of
1827, when, despite the pressure brought to bear by Grand Duke Constantine and Tsar Nicholas I, the court found the leaders of the conspiratorial Society of Patriots not guilty.13
The wide-ranging independence of the Kingdom of Poland was not
long-lived. The first attempts to limit constitutional freedoms were
made almost at the moment when the kingdom came into being (for
example, with the introduction of censorship that was in conflict with
the constitution), but the general withdrawal from the liberal experiment occurred after 1831. After the suppression of the November uprising (1831), Tsar Nicholas withdrew the constitution and began the
process of circumscribing autonomy, gradually limiting the autonomy
of the central organs in Warsaw and transferring part of their functions to St. Petersburg. Despite it, until the collapse in 1864 of the subsequent uprising of 186364, the kingdom remained a state with a
considerable degree of independence and fairly broad powers in internal matters.
It is particularly significant here that the Kingdom of Poland also
demonstrated a considerable degree of independence in policies concerning the Jewish population. The best-known instances of this independence are the rejection of a liberal project to manage the Jews in
Poland (which was the work of Novosiltzoff on the personal recommendation of Tsar Alexander I), the rejection of a project for Jewish conscription (introduced several years later during the period of limited
Polish autonomy following the uprising in 1831), and the fiasco of later
attempts to standardize Polish and Russian legislation concerning Jews.14
Until World War I, the political situation of Jews in the Congress Kingdom remained significantly different from that in the Russian Empire.
[91]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[92]
Jewish
Social
Studies
All this had a tremendous influence on the situation of all segments of

Jewish society in Poland. The differences in the conscription system between Russia, where the draft started in 1827, and Poland, where a much
less oppressive system was introduced only in 1843, greatly influenced
the mentality and political conceptions of both societies.15 The same can
be said about the influence of an act of emancipation issued for Polish
(but not Russian) Jews in 1862 or the failure to implement in Poland the
so-called May Laws limiting the rights of the Russian Jews after 1881.
Who Were the Maskilim of the Congress Kingdom?

Side by side with the above-mentioned tendency to ignore the autonomous nature of the Congress Kingdom is a still earlier tradition, according to which the lands of Central Poland were a region in which the
maskilic ideology was not accepted. This certitude, though not expressed outright, emerged among Galician and Russian maskilim, who,
describing the migration of the ideas of the Jewish Enlightenment,
maintained that it came from Germany to Galicia and from there to the
southern provinces of the Russian Empire, to Volhynia and to Lithuania.16 As one can easily see, this scheme by-passed Central Poland.
This thesis found the most classical expression in the writings of
Raphael Mahler; he was the most articulate spokesman of the long tradition of Jewish historiography of the nationalistic tradition.17 Mahler
claimed that the Duchy of Warsaw and the Congress Kingdom were an
area in which the Jewish Enlightenment movement did not develop,
because its place was taken by cultural, national, and religious assimilation.18 This was the most extreme expression of the thesis dividing
the Jewish modernization into two factions of good maskilim and bad
assimilationists. Some of the factors that Mahler cited as acting as a
deterrent to the Haskalah were: the lack of a central metropolis that
would normally constitute a natural maskilic center; the unattractiveness of Polish aristocratic culture; antisemitism; the low intellectual
level and incompetence of Polish officials at all levels; the enmity
shown Jews by the Polish state itself; the backwardness of the Polish
economy and the associated lack of a broadly based bourgeoisie (a natural ally of Enlightenment ideas); and a high percentage of conversions in circles that had been traditional supporters of the Haskalah.
All this was supposed to mean that the insignificant number of
maskilim who remained in the Kingdom of Poland were not interested
in Polish culture and gravitated toward the German language and culture. However, those drawn to Polish language and culture did so for
their own advantage, and this was in itself a conspicuous indication of

a tendency to extreme assimilation, which was a far cry from the aims
of the Haskalah movement.19 Among these suspect assimilationists,
Mahler named Jakub Tugendhold, Abraham Buchner, Ezechiel
Hoge, Antoni Eisenbaum, and Abraham Paprocki.
Although many of Mahlers claims have found their critics among
contemporary historians,20 it is still crucial for the understanding of
the Polish Haskalah to examine who Mahlers assimilationists and
their associates really where, what their ideology was, and whether or
not they really belonged to the Haskalah movement (whatever it
meant). The very term assimilation was obviously anachronistic, as it
was never used before the second half of the nineteenth century
neither by nor in reference to the Polish-Jewish progressives. They
simply did not define themselves in this way, and in the later part of the
century, when the term started to appear, it had a meaning very different from its English or Hebrew (hitbolelut) translation. The starting
point for my analysis should be, therefore, the ideological program of
the above-mentioned assimilationists, especially the most prolific:
Tugendhold, Buchner, and Hoge, and Abraham Jakub Stern.
The Program
The program put forward by the maskilim of the Congress Kingdom,
both in Polish and in Hebrew writings, was not original, nor did it fundamentally differ from similar programs put forward by Jewish adherents of the Enlightenment in Prussia, Russia, or Galicia. Its main points
can be summarized as follows: the dissemination among Jews of universal values and a disdain for separatism; the battle with some institutions
of traditional Jewish life and with manifestations of separateness; a secular education program and a productivization program; and an ideology based on loyalty to the state and to the monarch. Alongside these
proposals, which were directed at the transformation and modernization of Jewish society, the protection of Jewish identity (via the promotion of the Hebrew language, the Bible, and historical consciousness)
and a battle with pseudo-Enlightenment and religious indifference
played important roles in the ideology of the Polish maskilim.
Education
As was the case with all the Central and East European Haskalah, the
maskilim of the Kingdom of Poland were convinced of the inability of
[93]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[94]
Jewish
Social
Studies
Jewish society to adapt to the demands of the modern world, of the numerous morbid conditions pervading Jewish society, and of the flaws
present in many of its fundamental institutions. They were also aware
of the need for a deep-seated transformation of all aspects of Jewish society both in the religious and moral sphere and in the sphere of secular relations. And, as in the case of other maskilim, the Polish
adherents of the Haskalah recognized the fact that education, understood as the entire educational process, was a basic tool for change.
Tugendhold wrote of education that
[I]t leads us out of a degraded bestial state, it revives and it disseminates
those elevated and excellent strengths buried within us; it stifles and ousts
bad habits, encourages us to embark upon the roads of virtue which lead
us to our genuine destiny; in a word, it is . . . the torch of uprightness,
light and learning for the entire human race.21
Its ultimate aim was the transformation of Jewish youth into righteous
and useful members of society.22 The Polish maskilim did not introduce new content into the Haskalahs program of education. Following Naftali Herz Wesselys theories, they distinguished two trends in
education: religious knowledge and secular knowledge (torat haadam), simultaneously emphasizing the need for the harmonious acquisition of both spheres.23 Religious knowledge was understood as
the study of morality, complemented by the basics of Hebrew language
and grammar, and a knowledge of Jewish history and of classical religious literature, particularly of the Bible and Hebrew poets. The study
of secular subjects was to focus on Polish and German, astronomy, geography, and history. A familiarity with these subjects, particularly with
astronomy, was presented not only as a vital preparation for life in the
modern world but also as a religious obligation, testified to by the most
eminent of talmudic authorities.24
Productivization
Equally important in the program of the Polish maskilim was their interest in agriculture and crafts. It formed one of the canonic elements
of the program of the East European Haskalah, though this interest was
greater among Jewish progressives in the Kingdom of Poland than
among Haskalah adherents in neighboring countries. Poets composed
pastorals extolling the delights of rural life, and the authors of religious
compilations testified that work on the land was the most important
calling of the Jewish people and the one occupation approved by the
patriarchs and the divine lawgiver, Moses. Long lists of biblical figures
and talmudic scholars daily laboring on the land or at a craft were supposed to provide evidence that such occupations were not only open to
Jews but were also sanctified by religious tradition.25 Jewish agricultural
colonies in the Cherson region were described with delight, and, just as
the joys of rural life were praised, so too was agriculture presented as
the ultimate solution to the social problems of Jews in Poland.26 Jan
Glcksberg, the author of a treatise on the state of the Jews in the Kingdom of Poland, actually devoted his greatest attention to unsuccessful
colonization plans and saw the governments mistaken agricultural politics as one of the main reasons for the poor state of Jewish society.27
Agricultural colonization projects were also revived in many of the
projects submitted by the supposed assimilators to the authorities of
the Kingdom of Poland. In 1830, Tugendhold and Hoge, the ex-maskil
and convert (and ultimate penitent), respectively, went to the government with a proposal to establish an artisans school for middle-class and
poor Jewish youths and a fund for Jewish students in an agronomical
school.28 In 1836, the same Tugendhold stressed that the success of an
agricultural colonization was solely dependent on the exemption of
Jewish settlers from special Jewish taxes (the kosher and conscription
taxes). This is the only example in Tugendholds rich legacy in which
he allowed himself to criticize the governments policies in relation to
the Jews.29 Tugendhold even stated that the chances of success for any
programs aiming at the moral reform of the Jewish people depended
exclusively on progress made in turning Jews toward agriculture and
some crafts, which in turn depended on the creation of favorable legal
conditions.30
The Battle with Separatism
Besides the dysfunctional socio-occupational structure, the other
source of misfortune for Polish Jewry was, according to the maskilim,
the separatism of Jewish society itself. This view was shared by adherents
of modernization in the whole of Eastern Europe. The external manifestations of this separateness were the differences in attire, language,
and customs with which representatives of the Haskalah consequently
battled. However, what they recognized as being most dangerous were
those deeply entrenched beliefs that fueled a belief in the inferiority of
the Christian world and the religious sanctioning of Jewish separatism.
It was emphasized that cutting themselves off from Christians would
lessen the opportunities for present and future generations to solve
fundamental social problems connected both with non-adjustment to
the changing conditions of the outside world and with the untenable
[95]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[96]
Jewish
Social
Studies
socio-occupational structure. These ills could only be solved by integration and participation in economic, cultural, and social life in nonJewish society. It was also indicated that the antipathy shown Christians
by Jews created reciprocal antipathy on the part of the Christians toward Jews and that this made the position of Jewish people even worse.
Religiously oriented writers also noted that this discredited Judaism,
and they went to great lengths to convince Jews and Christians alike that
a hostile stance toward Christians had no religious justification and
that, if anything, it ran counter to the precepts of Judaism. Tugendhold
published in three languages (first in Polish and Hebrew, then in Yiddish) a treatise in which he stated that the expression akum (idolater) as
well as any religious notations connected with that expression were not
references to Christians but only to pagans. He also acknowledged that
his work was aimed at two groups of readers: Christians and Jews.31 It
was intended to convince Christians that the negative stance of some
Jews toward them had no religious sanction and that such a stance did
not emanate from the nature of Judaism but only from the fanaticism of
some of its less enlightened followers. Thus, it was an apologetic work.
For Jews, the text testified to the immorality of such anti-Christian attitudes and to the way they were in conflict with religious precepts. The
text was also intended to bring about a change in such reprehensible
behavior. Thus, it was a moralistic work. To broaden the social influence of the text, the author sought two rabbinical approvals (haskamot),
such as were traditionally used to support Jewish religious texts and to
testify to the righteousness of the authors work. In this case, the approvals were dispensed by the eminent scholars (both Mitnagdim)
Hayim Davidsohn and Jehudah Bachrach.
Other authors used similar strategies. Buchner testified that Gods
commandments applied to Jews and non-Jews alike. What is more, it was
necessary to behave with even greater integrity in relation to people of
other faiths than with Jews, because a sin committed toward a co-adherent
would be attributed by the injured party to the perpetrator, whereas a
sin committed against one of another faith would be attributed to the religion of the perpetrator, so that it would become a transgression not
only against ones fellow man but also against the name of God. The
chosen nature of Israel does not hinge upon a right to rule over others
but merely upon the duty of paying special tribute to God; hence, this is
not being chosen to rule, but to serve.32 Buchner also stated that even
the idolater is a fellow human and that a Jew is obliged to show him
brotherly love. Brotherly love of a non-Jewish person is actually one of
the main themes of the writings of Buchner, who frequently detailed different aspects of it, such as the bans on receiving stolen goods, on swin-
dling, and particularly on stealing from those of another faith, the

dictate of love of ones homeland, the obligation of loyalty to ones monarch, and the necessity of undertaking productive activities.33
[97]
Monarchism
The Haskalah
in Poland
Of all the obligations to the outside world, it was monarchism in particular that occupied a prominent place in the ideological program of
both the East European Haskalah and those in the Kingdom of Poland.
The principle of fidelity to the monarch was taken from the talmudic
maxim The law of the country is the law (Bava kama 113), which received, contrary to rabbinical tradition, absolute sanction.34 Other talmudic sayings, such as royal authority on earth is akin to royal
authority in heaven (Berakhot 58a) were equally popular. Of course,
there can be no doubt that the frequently emphasized loyalty to the
monarch that the maskilim of the Kingdom of Poland exhibited was as
strong as that exhibited by their counterparts in Galicia and Russia. The
honor accorded the monarch sometimes went so far that he was attributed semi-divine qualitiesthe supreme father of the land spoke: let
the unfortunate be cared for, and so it came to pass.35 Abraham Grossglck, the author of a theological treatise on the religious obligation of
love for the monarch, even testified that earthly rulers are proof of the
existence of God: Monarchs are appointed by decree of God Himself,
they are endowed with but a particle of His greatness, and the appointed are Gods Representatives here on earth and as such are visible
evidence of the Holiest Ruler of all time.36 Due to their being imbued
with a particle of divine majesty, monarchs were superhuman creations
and the nature of their spirit far more elevated than the spirit which
breathes life into each man created in the image and likeness of God.37
In this sense, the program of the maskilim in the Congress Kingdom
was an ideal reflection of similar views of the Haskalah in Eastern and
Central Europe, adapting the old political principle of the royal alliance with the monarch.38 It is even more striking when one notes that
the monarchism of the Polish maskilim emerged in political conditions
very different from those in absolutist Galicia or Russia: throughout the
early period under consideration, the kingdom was constitutional, and
after 1831 it was a semi-constitutional monarchy.
Preservation of Jewish Identity
The postulate of rapprochement with the surrounding non-Jewish
population, which was so important to the maskilim of the Congress
Marcin
Wodziski
[98]
Jewish
Social
Studies
Kingdom, was not identical to the assimilationist tendencies of which

they would later be accused, which were interpreted as the aspiration
to totally reject Jewish values. In reality, it was quite the opposite.
Alongside programs fighting against the outward manifestations of
separateness, promoting mental and occupational adaptation to external conditions, and opposing negative attitudes toward Christians,
an equally important element was the protection of Jewish identity by
strengthening the status of religion and religious values in the lives of
the Jewish population in Poland. According to the maskilim, this was a
campaign to be fought on two fronts, because the hardened fanatics
who poisoned Judaism with their calamitous prejudices and fallacies
were as great a threat to the religion as were the free-thinkers who
completely eliminated religion from their own lives and from society.
The campaign against the religiously corrupt pseudo-maskilim was
the obsession of Tugendhold, whose many works defended the status
of religion and its significance to social order and testified to the immortality of the spirit and the socioreligious obligations stemming
from this fact, such as the sacred nature of the traditions of Judaism.
Similar pronouncements warning against the disastrous consequences
of a superficial education and the weakening of religious ties can be attributed to many other maskilim.39
Publication of numerous works of Hebrew classical literature, collections of ethical sayings from Jewish religious literature, and support for
knowledge of the Hebrew language, the Bible, and the history of the
Jewish people constituted activities designed to strengthen religious
tradition. The Polish maskilim published the original versions of classical Hebrew texts of rabbinic tradition as well as their Polish translations.
In addition, the publication of the Mendelssohn Bible, the most significant work of the Berlin Haskalah, was a major undertaking. On the
model of the Berlin Haskalah, the basic means of popularization of a purified version of Judaism was the catechisms, whose task was the preservation of authentic Mosaic faith, according to the maskilim; this battle
was waged as much against the degeneracy of fanaticism as against religious indifference and assimilation. Thus, the catechisms were intended to teach the main principles of our religion and to save it, if not
from decline, at least from corruption.40 True, there was no consensus
on the very idea of main principles of religion. Some, like Eisenbaum,
advocated a fundamental transformation of rabbinic Judaism. The vast
majority, however, defended traditional rabbinic forms of Judaism,
with Talmud and Oral Law as their principles. In numerous reports for
the Polish government, Tugendhold, Stern, and even Hoge (before his
conversion) defended rulings of halakhah, Jewish religious law, and de-
clared it absolutely binding for the Jewish people.41 Attempts by Stern

and, later, by Tugendhold to implement traditional religious training
with an emphasis on Talmud and rabbinical supervision in the Warsaw
Rabbinical School attested to the conservative attitude that prevailed
among Polish maskilim toward religious matters.42
Historical awareness was supported by various stories and poems
based on accounts of well-known figures from rabbinical literature.
From a literary viewpoint, such works have no value whatsoever. A
number of characters, symbolizing that aspect of Jewish religious tradition that the maskilim recognized as the depository of authentic
Judaismsuch as the great medieval rationalist Maimonides and the
father of the Jewish enlightenment, Moses Mendelssohnenjoyed
considerable popularity. The popularization of the thoughts of Maimonides was the work of Buchner,43 himself a fervent rationalist; Mendelssohn found his greatest adherent in the person of Tugendhold.44
Few works were devoted to more recent history. Of those that were, the
most popular was the Hebrew adaptation of Marcus Josts work by
Shalom Hakohen, which was widely distributed in the Kingdom of Poland, thanks to the efforts of Tugendhold.45 Paprocki, the author of
the first textbook in Poland on the history of the Jews, wrote of the significance of history to Jewish identity:
If, in general, every person should have a knowledge of history, it is indeed
vital that the Israelites gain a knowledge of the history of their ancestors.
In historical accounts, one finds examples not only of a specific exercising
of ones obligations and of social virtues, of loyalty and obedience to the
monarch, but one also becomes convinced that all this flows from religious principles and that it is upon this that human happiness depends.46
Maskilim as a Social Group

An important feature of the Haskalah, emphasized in both older and
more recent research, is its structure as a social group. It should be
noted therefore that Polish maskilim constituted a typical social
group, one whose members were interrelated on objective (common
goals and means), subjective (self-consciousness of being part of a
group), and behavioral (contacts within the group) levels. Tugendhold, Stern, Buchner, and others defined themselves as members of
maskilic society, thus proving a strong collective identity. They also
maintained lively social contacts, undertook numerous collective initiatives, cooperated on a number of projects, and established quite a few
formal or semi-formal bodies institutionalizing their interrelations.
[99]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[100]
Jewish
Social
Studies
One of the most important institutions was the German synagogue

on Daniowiczowska Street in Warsaw. After its establishment in 1802,
it was a central meeting ground for nearly all of Warsaws modernized
Jews, not only those from Germanydespite its name.47 For more than
half a century, it was the informal headquarters of Polish Haskalah,
where numerous initiatives were mastered and conducted. The wealth
of quite a few members of this congregation, such as Isaac and Mathias
Rosen, Jakub Epstein, and Samuel Kronenberg, was also an important
instrument of the social influence and support for other representatives of the group. Another similar synagogue was established in Lodz
only in the 1840s.
Of the bodies institutionalizing maskilim as a social group, one
should also note institutions established by the government in order to
civilize the Jewish people in Poland. These included the Committee
for Censorship of Hebrew Books, the Advisory Council for the Committee on Jewish Affairs, and educational institutions, such as the elementary schools established in 1820 by Jakub Tugendhold, the Jewish
schools for girls, and the Warsaw Rabbinical School established in
1826. Their importance for maskilim working in these institutions was
two-fold. First, it enabled them to influence and cooperate on government projects of reforming Jewish society. (In this optimistic period, it
was believed their primal aim was to improve the social conditions of
the Jewish people.) Second, it made them independent both financially and socially from the still dominant traditional Jewish society,
which often viewed maskilic activities with fear, if not contempt. The
Rabbinical School played a particularly important role as a center of
propagation of integrationist (though not always maskilic) ideology
and as an institutional basis for most of the above-mentioned maskilim
(Eisenbaum, Buchner, Paprocki, Tugendhold). Over twelve hundred
graduates of this school established a strong social basis for the
Haskalah in the Kingdom of Poland.48
Apart from this, Polish maskilim, like their colleagues in the rest of
Eastern Europe, maintained contacts through a network of informal
clubs, salons, cultural assemblies, and, above all, correspondence,
which was the most important means of propagating maskilic ideology
and maintaining personal relations. The very term literary republic of
writers, often employed to describe these informal relations,49 might
seem a bit improper in the case of Polish maskilim, because few of
them were real writers. Most reduced their activity to journalism, translations, or compilations of textbooks. But even if they were not real
writers, they participated in the same literary republic, and for them
correspondence constituted the basic form of relations with other
maskilim in Poland and with representatives of Jewish Enlightenment

throughout Eastern and Central Europe. Again, Tugendhold can be
presented as an example. He maintained contact with almost all
maskilim in Warsaw and numerous enlightened personalities in Poland, Germany, and Russia (especially Vilna), such as Isaac Beer
Levinson (Ribal), Isaac Marcus Jost, Leopold Zunz, Shalom Hakohen,
Feivel Shiffer, his brother Wolf Tugendhold, Solomon Ettinger, Moses
Frankfurt Mendelssohn, Alexander Zederbaum, and Samuel Joseph
Finn.50 The correspondence with Ribal shows especially close contact
and mutual respect.
Does the Language Make the Maskil?

Surprisingly enough, none of the historians of Jewish assimilation in
Poland denied the proximity of the above-characterized ideologies
and programs of the alleged Polish-Jewish assimilationists with the
principles of Haskalah. It must be emphasized that the ideological
foundations of the Polish-Jewish modernization camp really were
identifiable with mainstream ideological principles of the Haskalah.51
In addition, nobody denied close contacts between Polish assimilationists and East European maskilim. What made many historians negate the similarities of these two camps were arguments of a rather
confusing and ideological, and not always historical, nature.
For Shatzky, Mahler, and others, the crowning argument regarding
the affiliation of the Polish-Jewish modernizers with the assimilation
camp, and not the Haskalah, was their use of Polish. The linguistic argument was of singular importance to Mahler; an analysis of the writings of the bad assimilationists and the good maskilim led him to
conclude that the ideological programs of both groups, even though
endowed with diametrically opposite epithets, were in effect identical.
However, this statement challenged Mahlers basic thesis of the existence of two competing trends of Jewish modernization in Poland and
forced him to search for a criterion that would ultimately prove their
dissimilarity. What is more, Mahler accurately established the identical
nature of the declared programs and noted that the maskilic camp as
conceived by him was so weak that it backed off from putting into action
its own standard slogans and thereby left this activity to the assimilationists. Thus, it was not the maskilim but the assimilationists who
carried out the program of the Haskalah, and, therefore, denying them
the honorific title maskilim was all the more incomprehensible.52 For
Shatzky, another prominent historian of Polish Jewry, the situation was
[101]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[102]
Jewish
Social
Studies
simple, as the title of maskil was based purely on moral judgment.

Tugendhold could not be a maskil, according to Shatzky, because he
was a careerist and cynical opportunist, who in his naivete created an
institution and in addition was a great coward and taker of bribes, and
Eisenbaum was a two-faced collaborator with the tsarist secret police.53
Mahler made a bit more sophisticated argument by introducing one
final criterion that permitted a clear classification and the distinction
between the assimilationists and the true maskilim: language.
From the epithets Mahlers attributed to assimilationists, it is clear
that the language criterion was only a sorry excuse for his value judgments. Still, the argument that love for and popularization of the Hebrew language is one of the chief identifying characteristics of the
Haskalah program is extremely significant, because historians of this
movement have traditionally treated literary works written predominantly (although not exclusively) in Hebrew as maskilic literature. In effect, the linguistic argument is a strong one because even a cursory
glance at the literary works of the progressive Polish Jews in the nineteenth century shows that they were predominantly written in Polish,
though a number of them appeared in Hebrew, Yiddish, German, and
even French. In fact, the very use of Polish has played a significant role
in the exclusion of these works from the research of modern historians
of the Jewish Enlightenment, even among those who have recognized
the traps inherent in modern historiography with regard to nationalistic provenance and in some measure have contributed to its verification. In this vein, items of marginal importance to the Enlightenment in
the Kingdom of Poland in the first half of the nineteenth century have figured prominently in research into the Haskalah (Moses Tannenbaum,
Eleazar Tahlgrin, Feivel Schiffer) as have later Hebrew publications
from the circle of Chaim Zelig Sonimski and Ha-tsefirah. Therefore, it is
hardly surprising that, with the exclusion of such prolific and influential
writers and activists as Tugendhold, Buchner, Hoge, and even Stern, a
conviction arose among many historians regarding the weakness and
shallowness of the Haskalah in Central Poland.
However, by making the language criterion an absolute measure,
the historians of the Haskalah in Poland have fallen into a certain trap.
The significance of Hebrew does not mean, after all, that Hebrew was
the sole language of communication in the maskilic literary republic
of writers. Israel Bartal emphasized the existence of bilingualism as
an identifying characteristic of the East European maskilim.54 In analyzing the attitudes of Polish-Jewish assimilationists toward the Hebrew language, one must pay attention not only to the statistical
dominance of the Polish language but also to the place of Hebrew in
education programs advocated by Tugendhold and other assimilationists, and to their overall attitude toward that language.
First, despite the statistical dominance of Polish-language texts, the
Hebrew-language literary output of the authors mentioned above is, in
fact, relatively extensive and interesting. The joint appearance of Polish
and numerous Hebrew texts in the legacy of these writers should be sufficient evidence of their proximity to the Haskalah. Buchner and Stern
published the majority of their works in Hebrew, and only a limited number in Polish and in German. Tugendhold, who specialized in translations and compilations, regularly published both in Polish and in
Hebrew, and this applied not only to textbooks, prayer books, and catechisms but also to works with literary aspirationsfor instance, the biblical poem of the maskilic poet Shalom Hakohen or Bhinat olam by the
medieval poet and philosopher Jedaia ben Abraham Bedersi.55 Polish
translations of classical Hebrew works featured prominently in the literary output of other Warsaw maskilim, such as Stern. Hebrew verses, usually of a circumstantial nature, were written by Tugendhold and Stern,
but also by less prominent figures such as the scribes of provincial communities, Herman Sephirstein, Samual Berson, and Loewy S. Feilchenfeld.56 Some of the less important Polish maskilim contributed to the
Hebrew maskilic periodicals in Vienna;57 others, including Tugendhold,
planned to establish such a Hebrew maskilic periodical in Warsaw.58
In addition, Stern, Tugendhold, Buchner, and their associates expressed more than once their attachment to the Hebrew language.
They emphasized its beauty and its significance to the religious identity of adherents to Judaism (who had, after all, rejected a national Jewish identity), for the understanding of religious principles and the
personal development of each adherent of Judaism. For example,
Buchner stated that the importance of Hebrew lay in the fact that it
was in this language that God created the world, conveyed His prophesies and commandments, and related the history of the Jewish people
to the adherents of Judaism. Thus, a good knowledge of the language
is necessary for the maintenance of Jewish tradition and for intellectual development, as a good knowledge of the rules of the language
engenders rational thought in a person.59 Henryk Liebkind preceded
his Polish translation of prayers with a defense of the beauty and significance of the Hebrew language.60 Equally characteristic is the 110-page
review of the Hebrew dictionary by Luigi Chiarini, which Stern and
Tugendhold wrote in a defense of the purity of the language and of its
future students, who might use the dictionary.61 Tugendhold also published a history of the Hebrew language and literature. In this, alongside some strange ideas concerning the similarities between the
[103]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[104]
Jewish
Social
Studies
Semitic and Slavic languages, he extolled Hebrew as the mother of all

languages and the depository of divine revelations, praising its beauty
and divine wisdom:
There is no element that the Hebrew language lacks to render it the adornment of eloquence. Naturally, it abounds in all manner of forms and elegant procedures of syntax, and it is when something does not belong to the
earthly realm that this language is singularly rich in treasure, those particular adornments of inspiration by which it outclasses all other tongues.62
This piece finishes by praising the maskilic revival of the Hebrew language and literature, and Tugendhold names Moses Mendelssohn,
Moses Chaim Luzatto, Naftali Herz Wessely, Salomon Dubno,
Salomon Maimon, and others among the restorationists.
Even more eloquent are the words in praise of the Hebrew language directed by Tugendhold to Feivel Schiffer:63
Would that all the Lords people would know their sacred tongue, would
that they should understand it perfectly, for the worth of every nation lies
in its language and its writing. . . . Hebrew language is the heritage from
our forefathers to us. Into it, all the unique treasures of our sacred faith
are absorbed; all the bonds of brotherly love are fastened by means of it;
within it are stored the treasures of solace for our souls which are bowed
down and our spirits which are sorrow laden; and by it our exalted hope
is engraved with the finger of God.
In summation, Hebrew maskilic writings were not a rarity among

the authors under discussion (and many others), and the attitude toward the Hebrew language was overwhelmingly positive. If one were to
label them on the basis of their Hebrew output only, it would go without saying they were full-fledged maskilim, perfectly in tune with other
followers of this ideology in Eastern Europe. This cannot be done,
however, because the Hebrew writings constituted only a part of their
literary activity; the Polish portion is also predominant. Does this negate their membership in the elitist club of the maskilim, even though
the ideology expressed in these texts was purely maskilic?
Why in Polish?
In order to answer this question, we must look for the reasons that led
them to write in Polish. Without such a context, very little can be
understood.
The first factor we must take into account is that of the differences
between the Congress Kingdom and the territories of Galicia or the
Russian Empire, which provide us with a model of the Hebrew
Haskalah. Having considered the different legal, social, and economic
systems, both from the perspective of the Polish Christian majority and
from the perspective of the Jewish minority, we should find it difficult
to expect that the Haskalah in Poland would assume a form similar
toparticularly with regard to languagetheir counterparts in Galicia, the Ukraine, Belarus, or Lithuania. As Mark Baker has rightly observed, multiethnic states and cultures (such as those in Eastern and
Central Europe, like Austria and the western provinces of the Russian
Empire) tended to seek a universal language in order to create equal
ground in terms of cultural communication and to allow the development of cultural partnerships that would override particular ethnic divisions. For the maskilim living in western Russia and Galicia, that
language was, of course, Hebrewand, in part, German. However,
wherever a mono-ethnic national culture predominated, modernization processes in Jewish society led to linguistic assimilation with the
native population. Examples of such linguistic assimilation in monoethnic states include eighteenth-century Germany, Holland, and England and the Kingdom of Poland in the nineteenth century.64
The second factor was the unique political and social situation in the
Duchy of Warsaw and the Kingdom of Poland mentioned above. Contrary to the negative opinions of a number of historians already cited,
the Congress Kingdom was a relatively modern (on an East European
scale), efficiently ruled state, which gradually put an end to its economic backwardness. Until at least 1832that is, up until the period in
which the Polish Haskalah developedit was a state led by well-known
liberals, or, rather, ex-liberals, former Polish Jacobins (members of a
radical revolutionary group modeled on the French Jacobins), leaders
of the patriotic progressive party from the period of the Four Year Sejm,
prominent figures in the Enlightenment movement, and freemasons.
Creating himself in this period as leader of a liberal Europe, Tsar Alexander I appointed to the position of viceroy a former Jacobin and Napoleonic general, Jzef Zajczek. One of the leaders of the patriotic
party, a well-known mason and anti-cleric, Stanisaw Potocki, was appointed minister of education, and various functions in the upper echelons of power were carried out by the radical Enlightenment writers
and commentators Stanisaw Staszic and Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz. The
influence of freemasonry was extremely strong, particularly in relation
to what was then a widespread belief that Aleksander I and his brother,
Grand Duke Constantine (head of the Polish Army), supported free-
[105]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[106]
Jewish
Social
Studies
masonry. Of the 16 ministers serving in the kingdom in the period

181530, at least 10 were members of Masonic lodges. Numerous senators and high state officials (for example, all the higher presidents of
voivodeship commissions, or provincial representatives of government,
between 1818 and 1821) also served in the lodges. For the entire period, the head of the Great Polish East was Potocki.65
These facts gave the Kingdom of Poland a modern, liberal profile.
In truth, the very same Kingdom of Poland proved that these distinguishing characteristics were actually a far cry from authentic modernity and liberalism. Viceroy Zajczek, the former Jacobin, proved to be
a conservative and weak politician; the majority of the liberal politicians soon renounced their former views, and those few who remained
faithful to them were forced to step down. It soon turned out that this
was not a state that was particularly well disposed toward the Jewish
people. The first signal of this was the withdrawal from the constitution of the kingdom of civil rights granted Jews by the constitution of
the Duchy of Warsaw (which were equally suspended). Historians have
rightly pointed to the stability of the former class structure and the influence of the conservative land-owning nobility as the forces that led
to the impediment of both the development of liberal ideas and the attempts to emancipate the Jewish people. Despite this, the traits of a liberal, anti-clerical, legally governed state with modernizing and
secularizing tendencies were definitely close to the ideals of the
maskilim and raised the attractiveness of the state, particularly as even
those acts most distressing to the Jews (such as the removal of their
right to sell alcohol) were not necessarily viewed by the maskilim as the
actions of an enemy. Likewise, radical arguments and suggestions in
debates on the Jewish question in Poland did not in any way frighten
off Jewish advocates of modernization. One must remember that even
the very critical attitudes addressed to traditional Jewish society at this
time were consistent with the general principles of the Enlightenment
tradition,66 of which the maskilim considered themselves to be the
heirs, and that the radical suggestions of Polish politicians and journalists such as Wincenty Krasiski, Stanisaw Staszic, and Walerian
ukasiski (enforced productivization, radical changes in the education system, the overthrowing of the authority of the Kahal, limitations
to the destructive influence of the Talmud, the battle with separatism in dress and language, and so forth) were in step with the programs of many Haskalah ideologists. Thus, with relatively few
exceptions, such as the well-known suggestion that the Jews be driven
to the borders of Great Tartary, the criticisms leveled by Polish writers and commentators against traditional Jewish society were not nec-
essarily taken by the maskilim to be unambiguously hostile. This is

clearly borne out by Jewish statements made in the dispute of 181820
(of which more will be said below), which emphasized the good intentions of most of the Polish polemists coming forward, even those with
highly restrictive proposals. That Jewish support for such radical plans
was by no means of a transitory nature is borne out by the fact that,
even 70 years after the debate, the well-known integrationist Hilary
Nussbaum defined the projects of these Polish writers and politicians
as redolent of civilizing tendencies and civic aspirations.67
The fact that the young Kingdom of Poland included in its structure
a relatively broad cross-section of educated Jews and that integration
also followed on other levels must have been a significant factor in the
linguistic assimilation of the Polish maskilim. The Masonic lodges
broke down religious barriers by accepting a certain number of adherents of the Mosaic faith; Jews participated more frequently in literary salons, and their participation in professional corporations and the local
stock exchange increased.68 Well-known activists and patrons of the
Haskalah, including Samuel Mchheimer, Natan Glcksberg, Jakub
and Jzef Epstein, and Eisenbaum,69 were freemasons. Actually, all the
above-mentioned maskilim were officials in various government institutions, particularly in their Jewish sections. Tugendhold worked in the
Elementary Schools Inspectorate, the Censorship Committee for Hebrew Books, the Rabbinical School, and many other state commissions.
He also managed the inter-denominational cholera hospital, sat on the
Citizens Committee of the municipal council, and was involved in numerous charitable organizations. Buchner was a teacher of Hebrew and
the Bible at the Rabbinical School and consultant for the educational
authorities. Paprocki and Eisenbaum taught at the same school, the latter also being a translator for the state secret police. Hoge was a consultant for the Commission for Religious Denominations and Public
Enlightenment (the Ministry of Education) and, after his baptism, became secretary of the Jewish Committee. The Warsaw maskil Jan
Glcksberg became secretary of the Advisory Chamber of the Jewish
Committee and the state attorney for Jewish divorce proceedings in the
Supreme Court. His brother, Natan Glcksberg, was an official typographer at the Royal University of Warsaw and the publisher of many government publications. Stern, who worked in the Elementary Schools
Inspectorate, the Censorship Committee for Hebrew Books, and the
Advisory Chamber of the Jewish Committee but who resigned from his
position as director of the Rabbinical School, was particularly active in
government circles. In addition, a number of lesser-known maskilim,
such as the city doctor in Warsaw, Beniamin Rosenblum, the voivode-
[107]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[108]
Jewish
Social
Studies
ship surgeon in Kalisz, M. Schnfeld, and the correspondent to the Advisory Chamber of the Jewish Committee in Posk, Joseph Frenkel,
were associated with various government offices. Naturally, the participation of educated East European Jews in state administration, or,
more precisely, in those branches responsible for the civilizing of the
Jewish people, was nothing exceptional. The same occurred in Galicia
and also, albeit somewhat later, in Russia. However, the Austrian authorities withdrew very early from an alliance with the Galician
maskilim, and friendly relations between the Russian government and
representatives of the Russian Haskalah came about only in the 1840s.
What is interesting is that the result of this alliance was the birth in the
1860s of a Russian-Jewish intelligentsia with a very similar profile to that
of the maskilic circles in Poland some half-century earlier. One of the
similarities lay in their attitude toward language.70
This same association of the most active representatives of the
maskilic camp with state institutions would have certainly induced
them to use the language of the state and to participate in that countrys public life. However, in the case of the Kingdom of Poland, such
pressure was still more intense in that the Duchy of Warsaw and the
Congress Kingdom were states far more protective of their Polish national character than might have been expected, given the extent of
their independence (ironically referred to at the time as semiindependence). This distanced the Kingdom of Poland still further
from Russia and Austria, which for obvious reasons rejected the idea of
national statehood and built the state within the confines of monarchical ideas. Polish education and national symbols, and the official use of
the Polish language, were promoted by the new government because
they were acutely aware of the threat to the nations existence, which
was a consequence of the trauma of the partitions. Such programs
were extremely compatible with the integrationist ideals of the
Haskalah and encouraged their participation in Polish public life
although, of course, for Polish functionaries it was not the Jewish
people who were the most important object of their politics.
With regard to the dynamic Enlightenment traditions in the administration of the Kingdom of Poland, this state was later than other Central and East European states to experience the conservative reaction so
typical of the period following the Vienna Congress. As opposed to Russia, and particularly Galicia, the Polish official apparatus from the first
years of the kingdoms existence sought allies above all in the upper,
educated echelons of Jewish society and perceived the maskilim, or at
least enlightened Jews, as their potential allies. In Galicia, support for
the maskilim in their struggle with Hasidism was withdrawn as early as
1806; the same occurred only in the 1840s in the Kingdom of Poland.
Equally, on a local level, officials resorted to using the advice and services of the provincial Jewish intelligentsia, particularly in matters concerning the civilizing of the Jewish people and thus matters of central
significance to the Haskalah. A rather intriguing Jewish consultant is
Dr. M. Schnfeld, adviser to the voivodeship commission in Kalisz in
the 1810s and 1820s. He was a member of the Mineral Society in Jena,
Germany, a contributor to the German-Jewish publication Sulamith, the
author of educational projects and surgeon for the Kalisz voivodeship.
He was approached by the voivodeship committee for his opinions on
private Jewish prayer houses, school reforms, the scope of rabbinical
authority, and the nature of Hasidism.71 Similar functions (those of an
unofficial learned Jew) were performed on other occasions by Warsaw maskilim. Similar conclusions concerning the relatively close links
between the learned Jews and the official apparatus can be drawn
from subscription lists of Polish-language works of the maskilim, particularly those of the very well connected Tugendhold. Of 480 subscribers
to the bilingual Polish-Hebrew edition of a poem by Shalom Hakohen,
only 170 were Jews (they were mainly members of the Warsaw bourgeoisie in addition to a number of well-known maskilim such as Adolf Bernhard, Pinchas Lipszyc of Opoczno, Mathias Rosen, and Stern), whereas
282 surnames were those of high governmental officials. Several Catholic bishops appear on the list as well as representatives of the Polish aristocracy, the well-known writer of childrens literature, Stanisaw
Jachowicz, the outstanding scholar and lexicographer Samuel Bogumi
Linde, and others. Similar ratios and namesamong them Viceroy
Zajczek, Senator Novosiltzoff, and the eminent writer Julian Ursyn
Niemcewiczare to be found on subscription lists for the translation of
Herz Hombergs Ben Jakir (106 officials out of 169 subscribers), the
translation of Moses Mendelssohns Fedon (153 officials out of 382 subscribers), and Bhinat olam by Bedersi (69 officials out of 184 subscribers).72 This would appear to be evidence not only of the close personal
links Tugendhold had with high state officials and their predisposition
to the charitable works, which such subscriptions were supposed to support, but also of a more general atmosphere of goodwill toward the Jewish civilizing endeavors that gave rise to such initiatives.
These factors must have brought the Polish maskilim closer to the
state, but above all to the Polish language. However, the ultimate incentive that played a prominent role in such a high proportion of Polishlanguage literary output in maskilic works during the Congress
Kingdom was certainly the phenomenon of public and, above all, political life, which forced maskilic writers to resort to polemic and apolo-
[109]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[110]
Jewish
Social
Studies
getic forms of journalism. As is widely known, the Haskalah took from

earlier Jewish literary activity the principle that writings for internal Jewish use were to be published either in Hebrew or Yiddish, whereas apologetic and polemic writings, whose potential readership was primarily
Christian, were to be in a world languagethat is, one comprehensible
to the surrounding society.73 Finn, the well-known maskil from Vilna,
praised Tugendhold for saving the glory of Israel, precisely because
he defended the Jews in the language of the surrounding society.74
Hence, whereas the overwhelming majority of publications by the Polish maskilim were didactic, apologetic, or polemic works, or simply political brochures, it would be difficult to justify why such texts would be
in a language incomprehensible to the polemicists. The publication of
Polish-language publications connected with successive stages of the
debate on the Jewish question, with antisemitic statements and with
government educational campaigns, provides a model illustrating the
connection between the language of publication and the nature of its
social function. Thus, we can see that the first wave of publications appeared in 1818, during the interval in the sitting of the First Sejm of the
Kingdom of Poland, when Jewish reforms were to be debated. An animated debate on the social position of Jews in the Kingdom of Poland
had waged since 1815 and now gathered even greater momentum, and
a series of brochures devoted to the matter appeared. Two works by Polish maskilim appeared at this time: Tugendholds Jerobaa, and Pinkus
Elias Lipszycs Proba czyli usprawiedliwienie si ludu wyznania Starego Testamentu (Petition or Self-Justification of the People of the Old Testament Faith). They were direct reactions to criticisms of Jewish society
leveled by writers and commentators taking part in the discussion and,
in particular, to the virulently anti-Jewish ideas put forward by an anonymous author (Gerard M. Witowski), who advocated sending the Jewish
people to the Tatarstan steppe. Replies to these and other accusations
by Polish antisemites were in the same language in which the original
accusations had been made, Polish.75 The Jewish declarations were met
with an animated reaction and were commented on in almost all the
publications covering the great debate, which lasted until 1820.76
The following Polish-language publications by the maskilim in the
Kingdom of Poland appeared in the first half of the 1820s and were
commissioned by government agents. They were predominantly textbooks and catechisms of the Mosaic religion that were printed either
simultaneously in Polish and Hebrew (less frequently in Yiddish) or
completely in Polish. Examples included Tugendholds Siedm modlitw
na siedm dni w tygodniu z hebrajskiego (Seven Prayers) (Warsaw, 1823),
his translation of Hombergs Ben Jakir (Warsaw, 1824), Hoges Nauka
religii dla modziey Izraelitw (Religious Studies for Israelite Youth)

(Warsaw, 1822), and Modlitwy Izraelitw (Prayers of the Israelites)
(Warsaw, 1822) as well as a dictionary and history textbook by Natan
Rosenfeld.77 The appearance of these and similar texts was, of course,
directly linked to the activities of the Polish educational authorities
and their plans for the education of the Jewish population, particularly
with the establishing of government elementary schools for children
of the Mosaic faith in Warsaw in 1820. An important aspect of these
government plans was also the sponsorship of the Polish-Jewish weekly
Dostrzegacz Nadwilaski (Beobachter an der Weichsel), published by
Eisenbaum simultaneously in Polish and in Germanized Yiddish, and
the establishment of the Warsaw Rabbinical School.
A series of polemic and apologetic works from the end of the 1820s
was also a reaction to the activities and publications of Luigi Chiarini.
The best known opinions in this argument appeared in the abovementioned review of Chiarinis dictionary published by Stern and
Tugendhold, in the press articles of these and other authors, and in
the translation of Vindiciae Judaeorum by Manasse ben Israel, which was
accompanied by an extensive introduction by Tugendhold himself.
The introduction addressed the accusation of Jewish use of Christian
blood in religious ceremonies, and it was a direct reaction to Chiarinis
publication, which had resurrected that accusation.78
Texts from the time of the November Uprising of 183031 were
mainly voices in the renewed debate about reform of the Jewish population and the Jews patriotic obligations toward the Polish state; they
included Dumania Izraelity na warcie w pierwszych dniach grudnia 1830
(Reflections of an Israelite Standing Guard) by the indefatigable
Tugendhold and another polemic publication attributed to Jan Glcksberg as well as a whole series of articles printed in the insurgent press.79
The collapse of the Uprising in 1831 paralyzed Polish-Jewish public
life for many years and the journalism associated with it. The next wave
of publications by the Polish maskilim appeared only at the beginning
of the 1840s, but even then it did not recapture the dynamics of the
pre-Uprising era. The next period of great momentum came during
the great Polish-Jewish fraternity from 1861 to 1863, but that lies outside the framework of this article.
Conclusion
Inevitably, the history of the Haskalah in the Kingdom of Poland is not
the only research theme to have fallen prey to nationalistic ideology
[111]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[112]
Jewish
Social
Studies
and the historiography that has been influenced by it. However, this
does not in any way facilitate the development of a new historiography
unencumbered by ideological considerations, particularly as the history of the Haskalah is in itself a difficult subject and one susceptible to
various interpretations. Above all, its overwhelmingly Polish nature and
Polish-language character create a genuine problem in terms of interpretation and in terms of the practical linguistic difficulties involved in
integrating such writings into studies of the Haskalah in Eastern
Europe.
In addition, having rejected the ideologically motivated former divisions into good maskilim and bad assimilationists, we are faced
with the necessity of comprehensively defining the place and role of
an entire range of influential figures of the Jewish emancipation in the
Kingdom of Poland. Questioning the former categories of division
does not mean that we automatically have to class all nineteenthcentury progressives as maskilim. The reality of the situation was definitely more complex, because in this group were disseminators of
maskilic ideals as well as representatives of other options in the modernization process, including assimilationists. All of this requires that
new studies be undertaken. However, having concluding that, despite
local differences, the opinions of the most important Polish-Jewish
progressivesTugendhold, Stern, Hoge, and Buchner (Eisenbaum
is an important exception here)reflected an unequivocally maskilic
outlook, it seems necessary to reconsider their position within the general framework of the Jewish version of modernization.
Statements as to the political, legal, social, cultural, and even economic context differing from that of Russia and Galicia, and particularly that of Prussia, is evidence that the Haskalah in Poland cannot be
described by using the same comparative measures applied to the
Haskalah in Brody, Vilna, Odessa, or Berlin. The mono-ethnic national culture, the significant degree of the Polish states independence, the dynamic educational traditions, and the high level of
participation of educated representatives of the Jewish community in
state institutions distinguished Poland from the other centers of Eastern Europe. Poland differed from the countries of so-called Central
Europe (for which Prussia was always a model) as a result of her delayed economic development, the legal status of the Jewish population, and, more significantly, the existence of a dense concentration of
traditional Jews who fought the emancipation process. This must have
meant that the Jewish Enlightenment movement in the Kingdom of
Poland assumed its own characteristics and proves that there were numerous dissimilarities and distinguishing characteristics. So were they
maskilim, or not? If we limit the definition of Haskalah to those fully

committed to spreading Hebraism, Polish assimilationists must be
certainly excluded. The advantage of such a definition is that it is very
sharp and precise. Furthermore, emphasizing differences between regional forms of Jewish Enlightenment is perfectly in tune with the tendency of regionalization in historical studies. And, after all, if the title
of maskil is not an honorary one any more, why should we insist on applying it to anybody? However useful and reasonable, this approach
does not seem to be very profitable for understanding East European
Jewish modernization because it negates the striking ideological proximity of Polish progressives with other maskilim in Eastern Europe.
Moreover, it negates both the self-identity of Tugendhold, Stern, or
Buchner, who persistently defined themselves as maskilim, and the explicit and implicit definitions of other East European maskilim who
recognized them as members of the same group. Is the dubious question of Hebrew versus general non-Jewish language strong enough to
justify the separation of Polish-Jewish modernizers from German, Galicia, Russian, Romanian, Czech, or Hungarian maskilim? Are the ideological differences between, say, the German and the Hungarian
Haskalah greater than those between the Polish and the Russian one?
The other possible approach is to expand the definition of Haskalah
beyond the borders accepted in the current historiographical literature. The main disadvantage of such an approach is that it goes against
well-established historiographical tradition, going back to the latenineteenth-century Russian maskilim and Dubnowian school of East
European Jewish historiography. Moreover, this new definition is far
less precise, disposed to far-reaching contextualization, and radically
redefines Haskalah (or perhaps the East European Haskalot, in the plural form of the word). However, if we recognize that the ideological profile of Polish and other East European maskilim were very close and
that they participated in the same social group called the maskilic republic of writers, then there is no good reason to refuse them the same
name, be it Haskalah, Haskalot, or anything else. Recognition of their
belonging to the same ideological and social formation seems to be important for a proper understanding of the history of that movement in
Poland and, more generally, for the history of the Jewish Enlightenment in Central and Eastern Europe. Polish-Jewish modernizers viewed
themselves as representatives of the Haskalah and traced their ideological lineage back to the circles of Moses Mendelssohn. This awareness
found expression on several occasions in facts and activities that would
be incomprehensible if taken out of a maskilic context. This also applies to almost the entire, relatively extensive Polish-Jewish literary out-
[113]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[114]
Jewish
Social
Studies
put from the first half of the nineteenth century. However, if we accept
the proximity of the Polish and Russian or Galician case, the Polish example might help us reassess many of the ideas about the Jewish Enlightenment in Russia and Galicia that have been taken on faith. An
example is the place of the Hebrew language in maskilic literary output, which, as it happens, was far more dependent on the general
cultural-linguistic conditions of the surrounding Jewish society than
traditional historiography has admitted. The languages of the
Haskalah in Poland are the most telling proof of this. Similarly, the Polish example may cast new light on the connections of the Russian
Haskalah with the state authorities or the development of the RussianJewish intelligentsia in the 1860s.
A reinterpretation of Jewish modernizers from the first half of the
nineteenth century might also shed new light on the moderate integrationist current from the second half of that century. The fact that
they were the direct descendants of the so-called assimilationists
from the first half of the centurythus, in effect, the direct perpetuators of maskilic ideologydemands a new examination of the meaning of the leading ideas of this group. The major role of education
programs and of religious solidarity, the meaning of religious disputes
and the zealous attitude toward tradition, the battle with shallow forms
of progress (which is a literal equivalent of the Haskalahs struggle
with the pseudo-maskilim), and the ties with the Hebrew language or
their specific type of elitism are factors that are comprehensible solely
when we look at this group as one straddling maskilic ideals and the
post-maskilic world.
Translated by Sarah Cozens
Notes
I would like to thank Professor Moshe Rosman, Scott Ury, and two anonymous
readers for their thought-provoking comments on the earlier drafts of this article. Thanks to Sarah Cozens for her language assistance.
1 In this work, the term Poland
has been reserved for the political entities of the Duchy of Warsaw and the Kingdom of Poland,
which reflects both objective
political divisions and an established tradition in the self-
definitions of the period, common for both Poles and Polish

Jews. For a broader treatment
of the meanings of the terms
Poland and Polish Jews in
the period of the partitions
(17951918) and their implica-
tions, see Scott Ury, Who,

What, When, Where, and Why Is
Polish Jewry? Envisioning, Constructing, and Possessing Polish
Jewry, Jewish Social Studies n.s. 6,
no. 3 (2000): 20528.
2 See, e.g., Jacob Katz, ed., Toward
Modernity: The European Jewish
Model (New Brunswick, N.J.,
1987); Immanuel Etkes, ed., Hadat veha-hayim: Tnuat ha-haskalah
ha-yehudit be-mizrah eropah (Jerusalem, 1993), esp. the introduction by Etkes (924) and the
bibliographical essay by Shmuel
Feiner (45675); Shmuel
Feiner, Haskalah and History: The
Emergence of a Modern Jewish Historical Consciousness (Oxford,
2002); Shmuel Werses: Mehkarim hadashim ve-gam yeshanim
be-sifrut ha-haskalah u-tkufatah
(19902000), in his Ha-kitsa
ami: Sifrut ha-haskala be-idan hamodernizatsyah (Jerusalem,
2001), 43372; and Shmuel
Feiner and David Sorkin, eds.,
New Perspectives on the Haskalah
(London, 2001). Two recently
published texts on the Jewish
Enlightenment in Central Poland and Krakw provide a commendable exception to this; see
Mordecai Zalkin, Ha-haskalah
ha-yehudit be-krakov ba-meah
ha-tsha-esreh, in Kraka, kazimierz, krakov. Mehkarim be-toldot
yehudei krakov, Elchanan Reiner,
ed. (Tel Aviv, 2001), 13153,
and Mordecai Zalkin, Hahaskalah ha-yehudit be-polin:
Kavim le-diyun, in Kiyum vashever: Yehudei polin le-dorotehem,
vol. 2, Israel Baral and Israel
Gutman, eds. (Jerusalem, 2001),
391413.
3 Ignacy Schiper, ydzi Krlestwa

Polskiego w dobie powstania listopadowego (Warsaw, 1932), 3345;
Jacob Shatzky, Yidn un der
poylisher oyfshtand fun 1831,
Historishe shriftn fun YIVO 2
(1937): 36264; Raphael
Mahler, Hasidism and the Jewish
Enlightenment: Their Confrontation in Galicia and Poland in the
First Half of the Nineteenth Century
(Philadelphia, 1985), 20312.
See also Raphael Mahler, Divrei
yemei yisrael. Dorot aharonim, 6
vols. (Merhavia, 195276), 6:
9293, and Raphael Mahler, A
History of Modern Jewry, 1780
1815 (New York, 1971), 36368.
I will discuss their writings in
more detail later in this article.
4 On the forerunners of the
Haskalah in Eastern Europe and
those from Central Poland, see
Immanuel Etkes, Li-shelat
mevasrei ha-haskalah be-mizrah
eropah, in Etkes, ed., Ha-dat
veha-hayim, 2544.
5 In this article I will discuss only
the period up to the 1860s. For a
comprehensive discussion of the
changes in the 1860s (both
emerging integrationist movement and later generations of
Haskalah), see my book, Owiecenie ydowskie w Krlestwie Polskim
wobec chasydyzmu (Warsaw,
2003), chap. 5.
6 See, e.g., Etkes, ed., Ha-dat vehahayim, 11, and Feiner, Haskalah
and History, 20, 317. Such a presumption is implicit in most of
the works mentioned in note 2.
7 See Jonathan Frankel, Assimilation and the Jews in NineteenthCentury Europe: Towards a New
Historiography? in Assimilation
[115]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[116]
Jewish
Social
Studies
10
11
12
13
and Community: The Jews in

Nineteenth-Century Europe,
Jonathan Frankel and Steven J.
Zipperstein, eds. (Cambridge,
Engl., 1992), 137.
One example is the cursory treatment of these themes in the
otherwise excellent study by
Michael Stanislawski, Tsar Nicholas I and the Jews: The Transformation of Jewish Society in Russia,
18251855 (Philadelphia, 1983).
See, e.g., Eli Lederhendler, The
Road to Modern Jewish Politics: Political Tradition and Political Reconstruction in the Jewish
Community of Tsarist Russia (New
York, 1989), 59, 102, 118.
See, e.g., John D. Klier, Russia
Gathers Her Jews: The Origins of the
Jewish Question in Russia, 1772
1825 (De Kalb, Ill., 1985), 170
81, and John D. Klier, Imperial
Russias Jewish Question, 1855
1881 (Cambridge, Engl., 1995),
14558.
See David Patterson, The Hebrew
Novel in Czarist Russia: A Portrait
of Jewish Life in the Nineteenth Century, 2nd ed. (Lanham, Md.,
1999), and, more recently, Mordechai Zalkin, Ba-alot ha-shahar:
Ha-haskalah ha-yehudit baimperiah ha-rusit ba-meah ha-tshah
esreh (Jerusalem, 2000), and
Feiner, Haskalah and History.
See, e.g., Alina Caa, Asymilacja
ydw w Krlestwie Polskim (1864
1897). PostawyKonflikty
Stereotypy (Warsaw, 1989), esp.
4986. Despite the title, Caa
deals with a broad spectrum of
ideological positions from the
moderate Haskalah to radical assimilation.
For a brief introduction to this
14
15
16
17
subject, see Stefan Kieniewicz,

Historia Polski, 17951918 (Warsaw, 1976), and Stefan Kieniewicz, ed., Polska XIX wieku:
Pastwo, spoeczestwo, kultura
(Warsaw, 1982). For a good example of the modern state of research and attitudes, see
Andrzej Chwalba, Historia Polski,
17951918 (Krakw, 2000),
25787, 31984.
A complete collection of reports
on the Novosiltzoff project can
be found in Archiwum Gwne
Akt Dawnych (henceforth:
AGAD), I Rada Stanu Krlestwa
Polskiego 283. For a critical
analysis of this project and the
Polish politics involved, see
Artur Eisenbach, Emancypacja
ydw na ziemiach polskich 1785
1870 na tle europejskim (Warsaw,
1989), 17996. On attempts to
unify Polish and Russian laws
covering Jews in the 1840s, see
ibid., 31622.
For a comprehensive account of
the influence of conscription on
the Jews in Russia, see Stanislawski, Tsar Nicholas, 1334, and Olga
Litwak, The Literary Response
to Conscription: Individuality
and Authority in the RussianJewish Enlightenment (Ph.D.
diss., Columbia University, 1999).
There are some examples in Israel Bartal, The Heavenly City
of Germany and Absolutism la
mode dAutriche: The Rise of
the Haskalah in Galicia, in
Katz, ed., Toward Modernity, 33,
and Feiner, Haskalah and History, 158, 22728.
For other prominent writings of
this type, see Simon Dubnow, History of the Jews in Russia and Poland,
18
19
20
21
22
23
vol. 1 (Philadelphia, 1916), 384

89, and S. Hirszhorn, Historia
ydw w Polsce od Sejmu Czteroletniego do Wojny Europejskiej (1788
1914) (Warsaw, 1921). On the
parallels in ignoring Polish Jews
in the historiography of the
Haskalah and Poland in the historiography of general Enlightenment, see Nancy Sinkoff,
Benjamin Franklin in Jewish
Eastern Europe: Cultural Appropriation in the Age of the Enlightenment, Journal of the History of
Ideas 61, no. 1 (2000): 135.
Mahler, Hasidism, 20312. See
also Mahler, Divrei yemei yisrael,
6: 9293, and Mahler, History of
Modern Jewry, 36368.
Mahler, Hasidism, 204.
For innovative criticism of
Mahler, see Zalkin, Hahaskalah ha-yehudit be-polin,
391413; Nancy Sinkoff, Strategy and Ruse in the Haskalah of
Mendel Lefin of Satanow, in
Feiner and Sorkin, eds., Perspectives on the Haskalah, 8788; and
Glenn Dynner, Men of Silk:
The Hasidic Conquest of Polish
Jewry, 17541830 (Ph.D. diss.,
Brandeis University, 2002).
Jakub Tugendhold, Mody, krtkie rozpamitywania religijnomoralne dla modziey szkolnej
wyznania mojeszowego (Warsaw,
1837), 6.
Jakub Tugendhold, Sowo w
swoim czasie czyli Rzecz na uczczenie
dnia, w ktrym zaoony zosta kamie wgielny nowej budowli rozprzestrzeniajcej Dom Przytuku Sierot i
Ubogich Wyznania Mojeszowego w
Warszawie (Warsaw, 1847), 11.
See, e.g., Abraham Buchner,
Katechizm religijno-moralny dla
24
25
26
27
IzraelitwYesode ha-dat u-musar

haskel (Warsaw, 1836), 121. On
educational programs of the Polish maskilim, see Jacob Shatzky,
Yidishe bildungs-politik in poyln fun
1806 biz 1866 (New York, 1943);
Zofia Borzymiska, Szkolnictwo
ydowskie w Warszawie 18311870
(Warsaw, 1994), 5457; and Sabina Lewin, Batei ha-sefer haelementariyim ha-rishonim liyladim bnei dat moshe bevarshah 18181830, Gal-Ed 1
(1973): 63100.
The religious significance of secular education was highlighted
in the Berlin Haskalah; see Isaac
Eisenstein-Barzilay, The Ideology of the Berlin Haskalah, Proceedings of the American Academy
for Jewish Research 25 (1956): 4.
Moses did not want to make
Israelites merchants, but he
wanted to turn them into peasants (Abraham Buchner,
Prawdziwy Judaizm czyli zbir
religijno-moralnych zasad Izraelitw, czerpany z klasycznych dzie
rabinw [Warsaw, 1846], xxiii).
See also Buchner, Katechizm,
11920; Tugendhold, Mody, 67
77; and Jakub Tugendhold, Skazwki prawdy i zgody pod wzgldem
rnicy wyzna, ze staroytnych dzie
hebrajskich, powag religijn
majcychKoszet imre emet . . .
(Warsaw, 1844), 7694.
Antoni Eisenbaum, Rozmaitoci, Dostrzegacz
Nadwilaski 2, nos. 3132
(1824): 24548, 25456.
Jan Glcksberg, Rzut oka na stan
Izraelitw w Polsce, czyli Wykrycie
bdnego z nimi postpowania, na
aktach rzdowych oparte (Warsaw,
1831).
[117]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[118]
Jewish
Social
Studies
28 AGAD, Centralne Wadze

Wyznaniowe 1416, pp. 3743.
29 Tugendhold, Mody, 7677.
30 Jakub Tugendhold, Odpowied na artyku w Nrze 174 Kuriera Warszawskiego z dnia 25
Lipca, Gazeta Warszawska 131
(1821): 188788.
31 Tugendhold, Skazwki.
32 Abraham Buchner, Doresh tov:
Kolel musar haskel ha-meyusad al
divrei ha-torah u-maamrei hazal lehorot et bahurei yisrael (Warsaw,
1822), 12ab.
33 Ibid., 3a, 24b25a; Buchner,
Katechizm, 13, 32, 8081, 92;
Buchner, Prawdziwy Judaizm, i
xx; Abraham Buchner, Kwiaty
wschodnie: Zbir zasad moralnych,
teologicznych, przysw, regu towarzyskich, allegoryi i powieci,
wyjte z Talmudu i pism wczesnych
(Warsaw, 1842), xxxxi.
34 On the limits of this law, see
Lederhendler, The Road to Modern Jewish Politics, 6168.
35 Tugendhold, Sowo, 1.
36 Abraham Grossglck, O powadze
majestatu: Sefer godel yikrat hamalkhut (Warsaw, 1856), 3.
37 Ibid., 35.
38 On the political ideology of the
Haskalah, see David Biale, Power
and Powerlessness in Jewish History
(New York, 1986), 1039, and
David Sorkin, The Transformation
of German Jewry, 17801840 (New
York, 1987), 6378. On the
royal alliance, see Yosef H.
Yerushalmi, The Lisbon Massacre
of 1506 and the Royal Image in the
Shebet Yehuda (Cincinnati, Ohio,
1976), 3566. For more on
maskilic loyalty, see Mahler, Hasidism, 5358.
39 Steven M. Lowenstein, The Berlin
40
41
42
43
44
Jewish Community: Enlightenment,

Family, and Crisis, 17701830
(New York, 1994), 95103;
Shmuel Feiner, The PseudoEnlightenment and the Question of Jewish Modernization,
Jewish Social Studies n.s. 3, no. 1
(1996): 6288.
[Herz Homberg,] Ben Jakir czyli
Syn ulubiony: O prawdach religijnych i nauce obyczajw dla
modziey Izraelskiej przez zapytania
i odpowiedzi, trans. Jakub
Tugendhold (Warsaw, 1824),
introduction.
See, e.g., AGAD, Centralne
Wadze Wyznaniowe 1408, pp.
823; 1409, pp. 24244, 26264;
1411, pp. 35861; 1420, pp. 104
13; 1448, pp. 39699; 1675, pp.
214.
Dawid Kandel, Abraham Stern
a Szkoa Rabinw w Warszawie,
Kwartalnik powicony badaniu
przeszoci ydw w Polsce 1, no. 1
(1912): 12025; Aron Rawicki,
Szkoa Rabinw w Warszawie
(18261862) (na podstawie
rde archiwalnych), Miesicznik ydowski (1933): 45, 1930.
See Abraham Buchner, Hamoreh li-tsedakah: Kolel pirkei sefer
ha-moreh ha-mlamdim tuv taam al
ha-mitsvot (Warsaw, 1838).
See Moses Mendelssohn, Fedon:
O niemiertelnoci duszy z Platona w
trzech rozmowach, trans. Jakub
Tugendhold (Warsaw, 1829),
Mendelssohns biography, and
Jakub Tugendhold, Obrona Izraelitw, czyli odpowied dana przez
Rabbi Manasse ben Izrael uczonemu
i dostojnemu Anglikowi na kilka
jego zapyta wzgldem niektrych
zarzutw Izraelitom czynionych
(Warsaw, 1831), introduction.
45 See Shalom Hakohen, Kore hadorot (Warsaw, 1838), 2.

46 A[braham] Paprocki, Krtki rys
dziejw ludu izraelskiego od jego
pocztku a do naszych czasw (dla
Izraelitw) (Warsaw, 1850), iii.
On the significance of the Jewish past in the maskilic conceptions of Jewish identity, see
Feiner, Haskalah and History.
47 Sara Zilbersztejn, Postpowa
synagoga na Daniowiczowskiej
w Warszawie (przyczynek do historii kultury ydw polskich
XIX stulecia), Biuletyn
ydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego 21, no. 2 (1970): 3157.
48 On the Rabbinical School as a
center of Haskalah and integrationist ideology, see Sabina
Lewin, Bet hasefer lerabanim
bevarsha bashanim 18261863,
Gal Ed 11 (1989): 3558, and
Antony Polonsky, Warszawska
Szkoa Rabinw: Ordowniczka
narodowej integracji w
Krlestwie Polskim, in Duchowo ydowska w Polsce, Micha
Galas, ed. (Krakw, 2000), 287
307. On the importance of
schools for the spread of
Haskalah, see Stanislawski, Tsar
Nicholas, 97109.
49 See Shmuel Feiner, Towards a
Historical Definition of the
Haskalah, in Feiner and Sorkin, eds., Perspectives on the
Haskalah, 218.
50 On Ribal, see Bernhard Weinryb, Toldot Ribal, Tarbiz 5
(1934): 199207, and Israel Zinberg, A History of Jewish Literature,
vol. 11: Hasidism and Enlightenment (17801820) (New York,
1976), 54, 59, 64. On Jost, see
Bernhard Weinryb, Aus Marcus
51
52
53
54
Jost Briefwechsel, Zeitschrift fr

die Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland 4 (1932): 2024, and
CAHJP, PL/82 (Josts letters).
On Zunz, see Bernhard Weinryb, Zur Geschichte des Buchdruckes und der Zensur bei den
Juden in Polen, Monatschrift fr
Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 77 (1933): 288, and
Jacob Shatzky, Archiwalia, Historishe Shriften fun YIVO 1 (1929):
72728. On Shalom Hakohen,
see J. L. Landau, Short Lectures on
Modern Hebrew Literature from M.
H. Luzzatto to S. D. Luzzatto (Johannesburg, 1923), 116, 125,
and Shalom Hakohen, Pierwsza
wskrzeszona myl o istnieniu Boga,
legenda staroytna z hebrajskiego,
trans. Jakub Tugendhold (Warsaw, 1840), introduction. On
Frankfurt Mendelssohn, see
Shmuel Werses, Sefer pnei tevel
be-zikato le-masoret hamekamah be-sifrutenu, in his
Megamot ve-tsurot be-sifrut hahaskalah (Jerusalem, 1990), 210.
On Zederbaum, see Salomon
astik, Z dziejw owiecenia ydowskiego. Ludzie i fakty (Warsaw,
1961), 19091. On Finn, see Hakarmel 1, no40 (1861): 31718.
For a very good definition of the
Haskalah, see Feiner, Towards
a Historical Definition of the
Haskalah, 184219.
Mahler, Hasidism, 22933.
Shatzky, Yidn un der poylisher
oyfshtand, 36264.
Israel Bartal, From Traditional
Bilingualism to National Monolingualism, in Hebrew in Ashkenaz: A Language in Exile, Lewis
Glinert, ed. (New York, 1993),
14150. It is also significant that
[119]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[120]
Jewish
Social
Studies
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
the Hebrew language plays a

rather minor role in Feiners
new definition of the Haskalah
(see Feiner, Towards a Historical Definition of the Haskalah,
219).
Shalom Hakohen, Pierwsza
wskrzeszona myl; Jedaia ben
Abraham Bedersi, Bechynothoam: Rozmylania o wiecie, trans.
Jakub Tugendhold (Warsaw,
1846).
Tugendholds poem in Werses,
Hakiza ami, 33. References to
many other poems can be found
in Wacaw Wierzbieniec, ed., Judaika polskie z XIX wieku. Materiay do bibliografii, vol. 1: Druki w
jzykach nie-ydowskich (Krakw,
1999), entry nos. 10941191.
See Bernhard Wachstein, Hebrische Publizistik in Wien, vol. 1
(Vienna, 1930), 71, 8182, 108,
188, 190, 21213.
Bernhard Weinryb, Zu der
geshikhte fun der PoylishYidishe prese, YIVO-Bletter 2
(1931): 7379.
Abraham Buchner, Otsar leshon
ha-kodesh (Warsaw, 1829), 4b
5b. Mahler claimed, with reference to Buchner, that [t]here is
no mention in his program of
the Haskalah of slogans for the
fostering of the knowledge of
Hebrew and the Bible nor of the
study of languages and wisdom. See Mahler, Hasidism,
217.
Henryk Liebkind, Modlitwy dla
Izraelitw na dni zwyczajne i uroczyste wraz z przekadem polskim
(Warsaw, 1846), iiiii.
Abraham Stern, Recenzya dziea
pod tytuem: Sownik Hebrayski i
pokrew. dyalektami arab. chald. i sry-
62
63
64
65
66
67
ackim po krtce obianiony

(Warsaw, 1830), esp. the introduction.
Jakub Tugendhold, Krtki rys
historii jzyka i literatury hebrajskiej, in Bedersi, Bechynothoam, 45. A shorter edition of
this essay appears in Tugendholds introduction to Shalom
Hakohen, Pierwsza wskrzeszona
myl, 520. Jakub Tugendholds
brother, Wolf, also wrote on the
similarities between Slavic and
Semitic languages; see Stanislawski, Tsar Nicholas, 115.
Mahler, Hasidism, 232. Of
course, Mahler commented on
this quotation, making the particular remark: Even the assimilationist Tugendhold alluded to
the connection between the Hebrew language and hopes for
the future.
Mark Baker, The Reassessment
of Haskala Ideology in the
Aftermath of the 1863 Polish Revolt, Polin 5 (1990): 239. See
also Ezra Mendelsohn, On Modern Jewish Politics (New York,
1993), 48.
Ludwik Hass, Wolnomularstwo w
Europie rodkowo-Wschodniej w
XVIII i XIX wieku (Wrocaw,
1982), 28081.
Arthur Herzberg, The French Enlightenment and the Jews (New
York, 1968), 268313.
Hilary Nussbaum, Historia ydw
od Mojesza do epoki obecnej, 5 vols.
(Warsaw, 188890), 5: 382. See
also Samuel H. Peltyn, Z przed
lat 70-ciu, Izraelita 24, nos. 49
50 (1889): 42829, 43839, and
Izraelita 25, nos. 12 (1890): 34,
1415. Similarities between the
Christian and the maskilic criti-
68
69
70
71
72
cisms were also noted by Jacob

Katz, Tradition and Crisis (New
York, 1993), 22627.
The areas of social integration
were comprehensively described by Eisenbach, Emancypacja, 25193.
Hass, Wolnomularstwo, 282; Ludwik Hass, ydzi i kwestia
ydowska w dawnym wolnomularstwie polskim do lat dwudziestych XIX w., Biuletyn
ydowskiego Instytutu Historycznego
w Polsce 28, no. 4 (1977): 326;
Eisenbach, Emancypacja, 27478.
On the alleged membership of
Eisenbaum in the Masonic
lodge, see AGAD, Komisja Rzdowa Spraw Wewntrznych
6630, p. 87. For more on the Jews
and Freemasonry, see Jacob
Katz, Jews and Freemasons in
Europe, 17231939 (Cambridge,
Mass., 1970); unfortunately, Katz
ignored Eastern Europe in his
study.
On closer relations between the
Russian Haskalah and the tsarist
authorities, see Stanislawski,
Tsar Nicholas, 5154, 11822; on
the languages, see ibid., 11518.
See AGAD, Komisja Wojewdztwa Kaliskiego 702, 704. On the
representative of the provincial
Jewish intelligentsia on the Consultative Board of the Jewish
Committee, see Dawid Kandel,
Komitet Starozakonnych,
Kwartalnik powicony badaniu
przeszoci ydw w Polsce 1, no. 2
(1912): 85103, and Eisenbach,
Emancypacja, 19396, 25860.
Homberg, Ben Jakir; Bedersi,
Bechynoth-oam; Shalom Hakohen, Pierwsza wskrzeszona myl;
Mendelssohn, Fedon. The sub-
73
74
75
76
77
scription lists are not numbered.

In Buchner, Kwiaty wschodnie,
there are significantly fewer
names of Polish clerks to be
found on the subscription list
than in Tugendholds publications.
See Sorkin, Transformation, 81
82.
[Samuel Joseph Finn,] Hakarmel 1, no. 40 (1861): 31718.
[Gerard Witowski,] Sposb na
ydw czyli rodki niezawodne zrobienia z nich ludzi uczciwych i dobrych
obywateli (Warsaw, 1818); Jakub
Tugendhold, Jerobaa czyli mowa o
ydach, napisana z powodu
wyszego bezimiennie pisemka pt.
Sposb na ydw (Warsaw,
1818); [Pinkus Elias Lipszyc,]
Proba czyli usprawiedliwienie si
ludu wyznania Starego Testamentu,
w Krlestwie Polskim zamieszkaego
(Warsaw, 1819).
The debate of 1818 has been described many times, the most
comprehensive description
being Nathan M. Gelber,
Sheelat ha-yehudim be-polin
be-shenot 18151830, Zion 13
14 (194849): 106143; Mahler,
Divrei yemei yisrael, 5: 16772,
29293 (containing important
information on the authorship
of some anonymous brochures);
and Eisenbach, Emancypacja,
165223. Hitherto unknown reactions to Tugendholds booklet
can be found also in the press:
e.g., O ydach w Polszcze, Rozmaitoci 1, no. 22 (1818): 97100,
and Wojna o ydw, Rozmaitoci 1, no. 19 (1818): 8688.
For a full list of the Jewish textbooks from the years 181764, see
Shatzky, Bildungs-politik, 22428.
[121]
The Haskalah
in Poland
Marcin
Wodziski
[122]
Jewish
Social
Studies
78 The most comprehensive description of the writings and activities of Luigi Chiarini and of
the debate around him can be
found in Dwojra Raskin, Ks. profesor Alojzy Ludwik Chiarini w
Warszawie (ze szczeglnym
uwzgldnieniem jego stosunku do
ydw), Archiwum ydowskiego
Instytutu Historycznego w
Warszawie, Zbir Majera Baabana, 47 (there is a copy in the
Central Archives for the History
of the Jewish People in Jerusalem, HM7426). Zbir Majera
Baabana (Majer Ba Collection) is an archival collection of
the master theses written before

the Holocaust at the Warsaw
University under the supervision of Prof. Balaban. The
collection has recently been returned to the archives of the
university, but the Jewish Historical Institute in Warsaw still
holds copies.
79 For basic information on Jewish
topics in the Polish press of that
period, see Ignacy Schiper, ydzi
Krlestwa Polskiego w dobie powstania listopadowego (Warsaw,
1932). Important amendments
can be found in Shatzky, Yidn
un der poylisher oyfshtand.

Wodzinski Good Maskilim and Bad Assimilationists, or Toward A New Historiography of The Haskalah in Poland

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Wodzinski Good Maskilim and Bad Assimilationists, or Toward A New Historiography of The Haskalah in Poland

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wodzinski Good Maskilim and Bad Assimilationists, or Toward A New Historiography of The Haskalah in Poland

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Good Maskilim and Bad

Haskalah from the scope of virtually all those researching the

What Was the Kingdom of Poland?

mal. In addition, from the 1860s, along with the commencement by

All this had a tremendous influence on the situation of all segments of

Who Were the Maskilim of the Congress Kingdom?

their own advantage, and this was in itself a conspicuous indication of

dling, and particularly on stealing from those of another faith, the

Kingdom, was not identical to the assimilationist tendencies of which

clared it absolutely binding for the Jewish people.41 Attempts by Stern

Maskilim as a Social Group

One of the most important institutions was the German synagogue

maskilim in Poland and with representatives of Jewish Enlightenment

Does the Language Make the Maskil?

simple, as the title of maskil was based purely on moral judgment.

Semitic and Slavic languages, he extolled Hebrew as the mother of all

In summation, Hebrew maskilic writings were not a rarity among

masonry. Of the 16 ministers serving in the kingdom in the period

essarily taken by the maskilim to be unambiguously hostile. This is

getic forms of journalism. As is widely known, the Haskalah took from

religii dla modziey Izraelitw (Religious Studies for Israelite Youth)

maskilim, or not? If we limit the definition of Haskalah to those fully

definitions of the period, common for both Poles and Polish

tions, see Scott Ury, Who,

3 Ignacy Schiper, ydzi Krlestwa

and Community: The Jews in

subject, see Stefan Kieniewicz,

vol. 1 (Philadelphia, 1916), 384

IzraelitwYesode ha-dat u-musar

28 AGAD, Centralne Wadze

Jewish Community: Enlightenment,

45 See Shalom Hakohen, Kore hadorot (Warsaw, 1838), 2.

Jost Briefwechsel, Zeitschrift fr

the Hebrew language plays a

ackim po krtce obianiony

cisms were also noted by Jacob

scription lists are not numbered.

the master theses written before

You might also like